% Encoding: UTF-8

@Article{Campbelletal2016,
  author    = {Campbell, Rosie and Cowley, Philip and Vivyan, Nick and Wagner, Markus},
  title     = {Legislator Dissent as a Valence Signal},
  journal   = {British Journal of Political Science},
  year      = {2016},
  pages     = {1--24},
  month     = jun,
  abstract  = {Existing research suggests that voters tend to respond positively to legislator independence due to two types of mechanism. First, dissent has an indirect effect, increasing a legislator's media coverage and personal recognition among constituents (profile effects). Secondly, constituents react positively to dissent when this signals that the legislator has matching political or representational preferences (conditional evaluation). This article presents a third effect: dissent acts as a valence signal of integrity and trustworthiness. Consistent with the valence signalling mechanism, it uses new observational and experimental evidence to show that British voters have a strong and largely unconditional preference for legislators who dissent. The findings pose a dilemma for political systems that rely on strong and cohesive parties.},
  doi       = {10.1017/s0007123416000223},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{FranchinoZucchini2014,
  author    = {Franchino, Fabio and Zucchini, Francesco},
  title     = {Voting in a Multi-dimensional Space: A Conjoint Analysis Employing Valence and Ideology Attributes of Candidates},
  journal   = {Political Science Research and Methods},
  year      = {2014},
  volume    = {3},
  number    = {2},
  pages     = {221--241},
  month     = oct,
  abstract  = {Most formal models of valence competition add a single, separable and unweighted component to the standard one-dimensional utility function of voters. This article presents the results of a conjoint analysis experiment in which respondents were asked to choose between two candidates whose profiles vary along five attributes. Four of these traits behave like valence or policy issues as expected, but one, which has been employed in recent formal and empirical works, does not. Moreover, policy and valence are not separable. They interact at least in some cases, taking a competency form whereby the marginal impact of valence on voters' choice is conditional on candidates' policies. This result lends support to recent studies that have found more extensive valence voting under ideological convergence. Finally, policy trumps valence in awkward choices. Respondents even prefer corrupt candidates with similar policy views to honest ones with different opinions, despite integrity being declared the most important attribute.},
  doi       = {10.1017/psrm.2014.24},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{KirklandCoppock2017,
  author    = {Kirkland, Patricia A. and Coppock, Alexander},
  title     = {Candidate Choice Without Party Labels},
  journal   = {Political Behavior},
  volume    = {40},
  number    = {3},
  pages     = {571--591},
  year      = {2017},
  month     = jun,
  abstract  = { In the absence of party labels, voters must use other information to determine whom to support. The institution of nonpartisan elections, therefore, may impact voter choice by increasing the weight that voters place on candidate dimensions other than partisanship. We hypothesize that in nonpartisan elections,
 voters will exhibit a stronger preference for candidates with greater career and political experience, as well as candidates who can successfully signal partisan or ideological affiliation without directly using labels. To test these hypotheses, we conducted conjoint survey experiments on both nationally representative and con- venience samples that vary the presence or absence of partisan information. The primary result of these experiments indicates that when voters cannot rely on party labels, they give greater weight to candidate experience. We find that this process unfolds differently for respondents of different partisan affiliations: Republicans respond to the removal of partisan information by giving greater weight to job experience while Democrats respond by giving greater weight to political experi- ence. Our results lend microfoundational support to the notion that partisan infor- mation can crowd out other kinds of candidate information.},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11109-017-9414-8},
  publisher = {Springer Nature},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{Sen2017,
  author    = {Sen, Maya},
  title     = {How Political Signals Affect Public Support for Judicial Nominations},
  journal   = {Political Research Quarterly},
  year      = {2017},
  volume    = {70},
  number    = {2},
  pages     = {374--393},
  month     = {apr},
  abstract  = {How do Americans evaluate potential US Supreme Court candidates? Using a novel, two-part conjoint experiment, I show that respondents put high importance on the political leanings of potential Court candidates, a finding in contrast with the scholarly view that the public views the Court as different from other, more political institutions. Indeed,
 when respondents are given information about a nominee's partisan leanings, they rely extensively on that information in deciding whether to support the candidate, whether they trust the candidate, and whether they find the candidate qualified. By contrast, when partisan information is withheld, respondents appear to use other kinds of signals, such as race, to fill in the gaps. Those who are most knowledgeable about the Court are most influenced by these partisan signals, providing further support for the importance of political heuristics. The results suggest that the public's evaluation of judicial nominees is more in line with how it evaluates other political actors. They also suggest that even candidates with excellent qualifications need not garner bipartisan public support.},
  doi       = {10.1177/1065912917695229},
  publisher = {{SAGE} Publications},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{BallardRosaMartinScheve2016,
  author    = {Ballard-Rosa, Cameron and Martin, Lucy and Scheve, Kenneth},
  title     = {The Structure of American Income Tax Policy Preferences},
  journal   = {The Journal of Politics},
  year      = {2016},
  volume    = {79},
  number    = {1},
  pages     = {1--16},
  abstract  = {In recent decades inequality in the United States has increased dramatically, but policy responses in terms of redis- tribution have been limited. This is not easily explained by standard political economy theory, which predicts a positive relationship between inequality and redistribution. One set of explanations for this puzzle focuses on whether and why redistributive preferences are muted in the presence of high inequality. While much recent research has focused on citizens' preferences over government spending, we argue that preferences over taxation are a central piece of this puzzle. This article implements an experimental conjoint survey design to measure American income tax preferences across six income brackets. We find that policy opinions are generally progressive but that preferences do not vary substantially from current tax policies, and support for taxing the rich is highly inelastic. We show that both economic and fairness concerns affect individual tax preferences and find that conflict is primarily over taxing high incomes.},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{MummoloNall2017,
  author    = {Mummolo, Jonathan and Nall, Clayton},
  title     = {Why Partisans Do Not Sort: The Constraints on Political Segregation},
  journal   = {The Journal of Politics},
  year      = {2017},
  volume    = {79},
  number    = {1},
  pages     = {45--59},
  month     = {jan},
  abstract  = {Social divisions between American partisans are growing, with Republicans and Democrats exhibiting homophily in a range of seemingly nonpolitical domains. It has been widely claimed that this partisan social divide extends to Amer- icans' decisions about where to live. In two original survey experiments, we confirm that Democrats are, in fact, more likely than Republicans to prefer living in more Democratic, dense, and racially diverse places. However, improving on previous studies, we test respondents' stated preferences against their actual moving behavior. While partisans differ in their residential preferences, on average they are not migrating to more politically distinct communities. Using zip-code- level census and partisanship data on the places where respondents live, we provide one explanation for this contra- diction: by prioritizing common concerns when deciding where to live, Americans forgo the opportunity to move to more politically compatible communities.},
  doi       = {10.1086/687569},
  publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{EggersVivyanWagner2018,
  author    = {Andrew C. Eggers and Nick Vivyan and Markus Wagner},
  title     = {Corruption, Accountability, and Gender: Do Female Politicians Face Higher Standards in Public Life?},
  journal   = {The Journal of Politics},
  year      = {2018},
  volume    = {80},
  number    = {1},
  pages     = {321--326},
  month     = {jan},
  doi       = {10.1086/694649},
  publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@InCollection{Sniderman2011,
  author    = {Sniderman, Paul M.},
  title     = {The Logic and Design of the Survey Experiment: An Autobiography of a Methodological Innovation},
  booktitle = {Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
  year      = {2011},
  editor    = {Druckman, James N. and Green, Donald P. and Kuklinski, James H. and Lupia, Arthur},
  address   = {New York},
  keywords  = {Syllabi},
  owner     = {Thomas},
  timestamp = {2013.12.11},
}

@Book{Mutz2011,
  title     = {Population-Based Survey Experiments},
  publisher = {Princeton University Press},
  year      = {2011},
  author    = {Mutz, Diana C.},
  address   = {Princeton, NJ},
  annote    = {From Duplicate 1 ( Population-Based Survey Experiments - Mutz, Diana C. )},
  file      = {:Mutz (2011).pdf:pdf},
  keywords  = {Syllabi, ParallelExperiment, StrongAttitudesBiasedEngagement},
  owner     = {Thomas},
  timestamp = {2013.12.11},
}

@Article{GrimmerMessingWestwood2017,
  author    = {Justin Grimmer and Solomon Messing and Sean J. Westwood},
  title     = {Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effects and the Effects of Heterogeneous Treatments with Ensemble Methods},
  journal   = {Political Analysis},
  year      = {2017},
  volume    = {25},
  number    = {4},
  pages     = {413--434},
  month     = {sep},
  doi       = {10.1017/pan.2017.15},
  file      = {:Grimmer, Messing, Westwood (PA, 2017).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{BechtelScheve2013,
  author    = {Bechtel, Michael M. and Scheve, Kenneth F.},
  title     = {Mass Support for Global Climate Agreements Depends on Institutional Design},
  journal   = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences},
  year      = {2013},
  volume    = {110},
  number    = {34},
  pages     = {13763--13768},
  month     = {jul},
  abstract  = {Effective climate mitigation requires international cooperation,
 and these global efforts need broad public support to be sustain- able over the long run. We provide estimates of public support for different types of climate agreements in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Using data from a large- scale experimental survey, we explore how three key dimensions of global climate cooperation—costs and distribution, participa- tion, and enforcement—affect individuals' willingness to support these international efforts. We find that design features have sig- nificant effects on public support. Specifically, our results indicate that support is higher for global climate agreements that involve lower costs, distribute costs according to prominent fairness prin- ciples, encompass more countries, and include a small sanction if a country fails to meet its emissions reduction targets. In contrast to well-documented baseline differences in public support for cli- mate mitigation efforts, opinion responds similarly to changes in climate policy design in all four countries. We also find that the effects of institutional design features can bring about decisive changes in the level of public support for a global climate agree- ment. Moreover, the results appear consistent with the view that the sensitivity of public support to design features reflects under- lying norms of reciprocity and individuals' beliefs about the po- tential effectiveness of specific agreements.},
  doi       = {10.1073/pnas.1306374110},
  publisher = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{Mummolo2016,
  author    = {Mummolo, Jonathan},
  title     = {News from the Other Side: How Topic Relevance Limits the Prevalence of Partisan Selective Exposure},
  journal   = {The Journal of Politics},
  year      = {2016},
  volume    = {78},
  number    = {3},
  pages     = {763--773},
  month     = {jul},
  abstract  = {Prior research has demonstrated a preference among partisans for like-minded news outlets, a key mechanism through which the media may be polarizing Americans. But in order for source reputations to cause widespread selective ex- posure, individuals must prioritize them above other competing attributes of news content. Evaluating the relative in- fluence of various contributors to media choice is therefore critical. This study pits two such factors, source reputation and topic relevance, against one another in conjoint survey experiments offering randomly paired news items to partisans. Making a news source's reputation politically unfriendly lowers the probability that an individual chooses an item, but this negative effect is often eclipsed by the positive effect of making a news topic relevant to the individual. In many popular modern news consumption environments, where consumers encounter a diverse mixture of sources and topics,
 the ability of source reputations to contribute to polarization via partisan selective exposure is limited.},
  doi       = {10.1086/685584},
  publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{BechtelHainmuellerMargalit2017,
  author    = {Bechtel, Michael M. and Hainmueller, Jens and Margalit, Yotam},
  title     = {Policy Design and Domestic Support for International Bailouts},
  journal   = {European Journal of Political Research},
  year      = {2017},
  volume    = {56},
  number    = {4},
  pages     = {864--886},
  month     = {may},
  doi       = {10.1111/1475-6765.12210},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{Carlson2015,
  author    = {Carlson, Elizabeth},
  title     = {Ethnic Voting and Accountability in Africa: A Choice Experiment in Uganda},
  journal   = {World Politics},
  year      = {2015},
  volume    = {67},
  number    = {2},
  pages     = {353--385},
  month     = {feb},
  doi       = {10.1017/s0043887115000015},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{WrightLevyCitrin2016,
  author    = {Wright, Matthew and Levy, Morris and Citrin, Jack},
  title     = {Public Attitudes Toward Immigration Policy Across the Legal/Illegal Divide: The Role of Categorical and Attribute-Based Decision-Making},
  journal   = {Political Behavior},
  year      = {2016},
  volume    = {38},
  number    = {1},
  pages     = {229--253},
  month     = {jul},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11109-015-9311-y},
  file      = {:Wright, Levy, Citrin (PB, 2016).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Springer Nature},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{BechtelGenoveseScheve2017,
  author    = {Bechtel, Michael M. and Genovese, Federica and Scheve, Kenneth F.},
  title     = {Interests, Norms and Support for the Provision of Global Public Goods: The Case of Climate Co-operation},
  journal   = {British Journal of Political Science},
  year      = {2017},
  pages     = {1--23},
  month     = {jul},
  doi       = {10.1017/s0007123417000205},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{HainmuellerHopkins2015,
  author    = {Hainmueller, Jens and Hopkins, Daniel J.},
  title     = {The Hidden American Immigration Consensus: A Conjoint Analysis of Attitudes toward Immigrants},
  journal   = {American Journal of Political Science},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Many studies have examined Americans' immigration attitudes. Yet prior research frequently confounds multiple questions, including which immigrants to admit and how many to admit. To isolate attitudes on the former question, we use a conjoint experiment that simultaneously tests the influence of nine immigrant attributes in generating support for admission. Drawing on a two-wave, population-based survey, we demonstrate that Americans view educated immigrants in high-status jobs favorably, whereas they view those who lack plans to work, entered without authorization, are Iraqi, or do not speak English unfavorably. Strikingly, Americans' preferences vary little with their own education, partisanship, labor market position, ethnocentrism, or other attributes. Beneath partisan divisions over immigration lies a broad consensus about who should be admitted to the country. The results are consistent with norms-based and sociotropic explanations of immigration attitudes. This consensus points to limits in both theories emphasizing economic and cultural threats, and sheds new light on an ongoing policy debate.},
  doi       = {10.1111/ajps.12138},
  file      = {:Hainmueller, Hopkins (AJPS, 2014).pdf:PDF},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{Sobolewskaetal2017,
  author    = {Sobolewska, Maria and Galandini, Silvia and Lessard-Phillips, Laurence},
  title     = {The public view of immigrant integration: multidimensional and consensual: Evidence from survey experiments in the {UK} and the {Netherlands}},
  journal   = {Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies},
  year      = {2017},
  volume    = {43},
  number    = {1},
  pages     = {58--79},
  month     = {nov},
  doi       = {10.1080/1369183x.2016.1248377},
  file      = {:Sobolewska, Galandini, Lessard-Phillips (JEMS, 2017).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Informa {UK} Limited},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{GainesKuklinskiQuirk2007,
  author    = {Gaines, Brian J. and Kuklinski, James H. and Quirk, Paul J.},
  title     = {The Logic of the Survey Experiment Reexamined},
  journal   = {Political Analysis},
  year      = {2007},
  volume    = {15},
  number    = {1},
  pages     = {1--20},
  month     = oct,
  issn      = {1047-1987},
  doi       = {10.1093/pan/mpl008},
  file      = {:Gaines, Kuklinski, Quirk (Pol Analysis, 2006) - The Logic of the Survey Experiment Reexamined.pdf:pdf;:Gaines, Kuklinski, Quirk (Pol Analysis, 2007).pdf:pdf},
  keywords  = {Byproduct Exposure, Syllabi, methods},
  owner     = {Thomas},
  timestamp = {2013.12.11},
  url       = {http://pan.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/doi/10.1093/pan/mpl008},
}

@Book{Cairo2016,
  title     = {The Truthful Art},
  publisher = {New Riders},
  year      = {2016},
  author    = {Cairo, Alberto},
  isbn      = {0321934075},
  date      = {2016-02-18},
  ean       = {9780321934079},
  pagetotal = {400},
  url       = {http://www.ebook.de/de/product/24190379/alberto_cairo_the_truthful_art.html},
}

@Article{HainmuellerHopkinsYamamoto2014,
  author      = {Hainmueller, Jens and Hopkins, Daniel J. and Yamamoto, Teppei},
  title       = {Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multi-Dimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments},
  journal     = {Political Analysis},
  year        = {2014},
  volume      = {22},
  pages       = {1--30},
  abstract    = {Survey experiments are a core tool for causal inference. Yet, the design of classical survey experiments prevents them from identifying which components of a multidimensional treatment are influential. Here, we show how conjoint analysis, an experimental design yet to be widely applied in political science, enables researchers to estimate the causal effects of multiple treatment components and assess several causal hypotheses simultaneously. In conjoint analysis, respondents score a set of alternatives, where each has randomly varied attributes. Here, we undertake a formal identification analysis to integrate conjoint analysis with the potential outcomes framework for causal inference. We propose a new causal estimand and show that it can be nonparametrically identified and easily estimated from conjoint data using a fully randomized design. The analysis enables us to propose diagnostic checks for the identification assumptions. We then demonstrate the value of these techniques through empirical applications to voter decision making and attitudes toward immigrants.},
  address     = {Boston, MA},
  doi         = {10.1093/pan/mpt024},
  file        = {Final:Hainmueller, Hopkins, Yamamoto (PA, 2014).pdf:PDF;Working paper:/Users/Thomas/Documents/Library/Hainmueller, Hopkins, Yamamoto (Working paper, 2012).pdf:PDF},
  institution = {Massachussets Institute of Technology},
  keywords    = {conjoint analysis, design, fractional factorial, marginal component-specific effects, methods, orthogonal design, potential outcomes, public opinion, randomized design, vote choice},
  owner       = {Thomas},
  timestamp   = {2018-02-22},
}

@Article{GallegoMarx2017,
  author    = {Gallego, Aina and Marx, Paul},
  title     = {Multi-dimensional preferences for labour market reforms: a conjoint experiment},
  journal   = {Journal of European Public Policy},
  year      = {2017},
  volume    = {24},
  number    = {7},
  pages     = {1027--1047},
  month     = {may},
  doi       = {10.1080/13501763.2016.1170191},
  file      = {:Gallego, Marx (JEPP, 2017).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Informa {UK} Limited},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{GreenKern2012,
  author    = {Green, Donald P. and Kern, Holger L.},
  title     = {Modeling Heterogeneous Treatment Effects in Survey Experiments with Bayesian Additive Regression Trees},
  journal   = {Public Opinion Quarterly},
  year      = {2012},
  volume    = {76},
  number    = {3},
  pages     = {491--511},
  month     = sep,
  issn      = {0033-362X},
  doi       = {10.1093/poq/nfs036},
  file      = {:Green, Kern (POQ, 2012).pdf:pdf;:Green, Kern (Working paper, 2012).pdf:pdf},
  keywords  = {methods},
  owner     = {Thomas},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
  url       = {http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/doi/10.1093/poq/nfs036},
}

@Article{RatkovicTingley2017,
  author    = {Ratkovic, Marc and Tingley, Dustin},
  title     = {Sparse Estimation and Uncertainty with Application to Subgroup Analysis},
  journal   = {Political Analysis},
  year      = {2017},
  volume    = {25},
  number    = {1},
  pages     = {1--40},
  month     = {jan},
  abstract  = {We introduce a Bayesian method, LASSOplus, that unifies recent contributions in the sparse modeling literatures,whilesubstantiallyextendingpre-existingestimatorsintermsofbothperformanceandflexibility. Unlike existing Bayesian variable selection methods, LASSOplus both selects and estimates efects while returning estimated confidence intervals for discovered efects. Furthermore, we show how LASSOplus easily extends to modeling repeated observations and permits a simple Bonferroni correction to control coverage on confidence intervals among discovered efects. We situate LASSOplus in the literature on how to estimate subgroup efects, a topic that ofen leads to a proliferation of estimation parameters. We also oferasimplepreprocessingstepthatdrawsonrecenttheoreticalworktoestimatehigher-orderefectsthat can be interpreted independently of their lower-order terms. A simulation study illustrates the method's performance relative to several existing variable selection methods. In addition, we apply LASSOplus to an existingstudyonpublicsupportforclimatetreatiestoillustratethemethod'sabilitytodiscoversubstantive and relevant efects. Sofware implementing the method is publicly available in theR packagesparsereg.},
  doi       = {10.1017/pan.2016.14},
  file      = {:Ratkovic, Tingley (PA, 2017).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{Hankinson2018,
  author    = {Hankinson, Michael},
  title     = {When Do Renters Behave Like Homeowners? High Rent, Price Anxiety, and {NIMBYism}},
  journal   = {American Political Science Review},
  year      = {2018},
  volume    = {112},
  number    = {3},
  pages     = {473--493},
  month     = {mar},
  doi       = {10.1017/s0003055418000035},
  file      = {:Hankinson (APSR, 2018).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{HansenOlsenBech2014,
  author    = {Hansen, Kasper M. and Olsen, Asmus L. and Bech, Mickael},
  title     = {Cross-National Yardstick Comparisons: A Choice Experiment on a Forgotten Voter Heuristic},
  journal   = {Political Behavior},
  year      = {2014},
  volume    = {37},
  number    = {4},
  pages     = {767--789},
  month     = {sep},
  abstract  = {Comparing performance between countries is both a theoretically and intuitively useful yardstick for voters. Cross-national comparisons provide voters with heuristics that are less cognitively demanding, less ambiguous, and less uncertain than solely national, absolute performance measurements. We test this proposition using a unique, choice experiment embedded in the 2011 Danish National Election Study. This design allows to contrast cross-national comparisons with more traditional national sociotropic and egotropic concerns. The findings suggest that voters are strongly influenced by cross-national performance comparisons—even when accounting for classic national sociotropic and egotropic items. Specifically, voters respond strongly to how the prospective wealth of Denmark evolves relative to the neighboring Sweden. Interestingly, voters are more negative in their response to cross-national losses compared to their positive response to cross-national gains—indicating a negativity bias in voters' preferences.},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11109-014-9288-y},
  publisher = {Springer Nature},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Article{Druckmanetal2006,
  author    = {Druckman, James N. and Green, Donald P. and Kuklinski, James H. and Lupia, Arthur},
  title     = {The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science},
  journal   = {American Political Science Review},
  year      = {2006},
  volume    = {100},
  number    = {4},
  pages     = {627--635},
  issn      = {0003-0554},
  file      = {:Druckman, Green, Kuklinski, Lupia (APSR, 2006).pdf:pdf},
  keywords  = {Self-SelectedTreatmentEffects, POLIS, Dissertation, reporting standards, Syllabi, ParallelExperiment, methods},
  owner     = {Thomas},
  timestamp = {2013.12.11},
  url       = {http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract\_S0003055406062514},
}

@Article{BansakHainmuellerHangartner2016,
  author    = {Bansak, Kirk and Hainmueller, Jens and Hangartner, Dominik},
  title     = {How economic, humanitarian, and religious concerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers},
  journal   = {Science},
  year      = {2016},
  volume    = {354},
  number    = {6309},
  pages     = {217--222},
  month     = {sep},
  abstract  = {What types of asylum seekers are Europeans willing to accept? We conducted a conjoint experiment asking 18,000 eligible voters in 15 European countries to evaluate 180,000 profiles of asylum seekers that randomly varied on nine attributes. Asylum seekers who have higher employability, have more consistent asylum testimonies and severe vulnerabilities, and are Christian rather than Muslim received the greatest public support. These results suggest that public preferences over asylum seekers are shaped by sociotropic evaluations of their potential economic contributions, humanitarian concerns about the deservingness of their claims, and anti-Muslim bias. These preferences are similar across respondents of different age, education, income, and political ideology, as well as across the surveyed countries. This public consensus on what types of asylum seekers to accept has important implications for theory and policy.},
  doi       = {10.1126/science.aag2147},
  file      = {:Bansak, Hainmueller, Hangartner (Science, 2016).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {American Association for the Advancement of Science ({AAAS})},
  timestamp = {2017-06-24},
  url       = {https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.aag2147},
}

@Article{VivyanWagner2016,
  author    = {Vivyan, Nick and Wagner, Markus},
  title     = {House or home? Constituent preferences over legislator effort allocation},
  journal   = {European Journal of Political Research},
  year      = {2016},
  volume    = {55},
  number    = {1},
  pages     = {81--99},
  month     = {oct},
  doi       = {10.1111/1475-6765.12119},
  file      = {:Vivyan, Wagner (EJPR, 2016).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{CarnesLupu2016,
  author    = {Carnes, Nicholas and Lupu, Noam},
  title     = {Do Voters Dislike Working-Class Candidates? Voter Biases and the Descriptive Underrepresentation of the Working Class},
  journal   = {American Political Science Review},
  year      = {2016},
  volume    = {110},
  number    = {04},
  pages     = {832--844},
  month     = {nov},
  abstract  = {In most democracies, lawmakers tend to be vastly better off than the citizens who elect them. Is that because voters prefer more affluent politicians over leaders from working-class backgrounds? In this article, we report the results of candidate choice experiments embedded in surveys in Britain,
 the United States, and Argentina. Using conjoint designs, we asked voters in these different contexts to choose between two hypothetical candidates, randomly varying several of the candidates' personal characteristics, including whether they had worked in blue-collar or white-collar jobs. Contrary to the idea that voters prefer affluent politicians, the voters in our experiments viewed hypothetical candidates from the working class as equally qualified, more relatable, and just as likely to get their votes. Voters do not seem to be behind the shortage of working-class politicians. To the contrary, British, American, and Argentine voters seem perfectly willing to cast their ballots for working-class candidates.},
  doi       = {10.1017/s0003055416000551},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-03-07},
}

@Manual{Leeper2018cregg,
  title     = {cregg: Simple Conjoint Analyses and Visualization},
  author    = {Thomas J. Leeper},
  year      = {2018},
  note      = {R package version 0.2.1},
  timestamp = {2018-07-09},
}

@Article{TeeleKallaRosenbluth2018,
  author    = {Teele, Dawn Langan and Kalla, Joshua and Rosenbluth, Frances},
  title     = {The Ties That Double Bind: Social Roles and Women's Underrepresentation in Politics},
  journal   = {American Political Science Review},
  year      = {2018},
  volume    = {112},
  number    = {3},
  pages     = {525--541},
  month     = {jun},
  abstract  = {This paper theorizes three forms of bias that might limit women’s representation: outright hostility, double standards, and a double bind whereby desired traits present bigger burdens for women than men. We examine these forms of bias using conjoint experiments derived from several original surveys -- a population survey of American voters and two rounds of surveys of American public officials. We find no evidence of outright discrimination or of double standards. All else equal, most groups of respondents prefer female candidates, and evaluate men and women with identical profiles similarly. But on closer inspection, all is not equal. Across the board, elites and voters prefer candidates with traditional household profiles such as being married and having children,resulting in a double bind for many women. So long as social expectations about women’s familial commitments cut against the demands of a full-time political career,women are likely to remain underrepresented in politics.},
  doi       = {10.1017/s0003055418000217},
  file      = {:Teele, Kalla, Rosenbluth (APSR, 2018).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-07-09},
}

@Article{OliverosSchuster2018,
  author    = {Oliveros, Virginia and Schuster, Christian},
  title     = {Merit, Tenure, and Bureaucratic Behavior: Evidence From a Conjoint Experiment in the Dominican Republic},
  journal   = {Comparative Political Studies},
  year      = {2018},
  volume    = {51},
  number    = {6},
  pages     = {759--792},
  month     = {jun},
  doi       = {10.1177/0010414017710268},
  file      = {:Oliveros, Schuster (CPS, 2018).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {{SAGE} Publications},
  timestamp = {2018-07-10},
}

@Article{Careyetal2018,
  author    = {Carey, John M. and Carman, Kevin R. and Clayton, Katherine P. and Horiuchim, Yusaku and Htun, Mala and Ortiz, Brittany},
  title     = {Who wants to hire a more diverse faculty? A conjoint analysis of faculty and student preferences for gender and racial/ethnic diversity},
  journal   = {Politics, Groups, and Identities},
  year      = {2018},
  pages     = {1--19},
  abstract  = {What explains the scarcity of women and under-represented minorities among university faculty relative to their share of Ph.D. recipients? Among many potential explanations, we focus on the “demand” side of faculty diversity. Using fully randomized conjoint analysis, we explore patterns of support for, and resistance to, the hiring of faculty candidates from different social groups at two large public universities in the U.S. We find that faculty are strongly supportive of diversity: holding other attributes of (hypothetical) candidates constant, for example, faculty at both universities are between 11 and 21 percentage points more likely to prefer a Hispanic, black, or Native American candidate to a white one. Furthermore, preferences for diversity in faculty hiring are stronger among faculty than among students. These results suggest that the primary reason for the lack of diversity among faculty is not a lack of desire to hire them, but the accumulation of implicit and institutionalized biases, and their related consequences, at later stages in the pipeline. },
  doi       = {10.1080/21565503.2018.1491866},
  publisher = {Routledge},
  timestamp = {2018-11-10},
  url       = { 
        https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2018.1491866
    
},
}

@Article{EgamiImai2018,
  author    = {Naoki Egami and Kosuke Imai},
  title     = {Causal Interaction in Factorial Experiments: Application to Conjoint Analysis},
  journal   = {Journal of the American Statistical Association},
  year      = {2018},
  pages     = {1--34},
  month     = {jun},
  abstract  = {We study causal interaction in factorial experiments, in which several factors, each with multiple levels, are randomized to form a large number of possible treatment combinations. Examples of such experiments include conjoint analysis, which is often used by social scientists to analyze multidimensional preferences in a population. To characterize the structure of causal interaction in factorial experiments, we propose a new causal interaction effect, called the average marginal interaction effect (AMIE). Unlike the conventional interaction effect, the relative magnitude of the AMIE does not depend on the choice of baseline conditions, making its interpretation intuitive even for higher-order in- teractions. We show that the AMIE can be nonparametrically estimated using ANOVA regression with weighted zero-sum constraints. Because the AMIEs are invariant to the choice of baseline conditions, we directly regularize them by collapsing levels and selecting factors within a penalized ANOVA framework. This regularized estimation procedure reduces false discovery rate and further facilitates interpretation. Finally, we apply the proposed methodology to the conjoint analysis of ethnic voting behavior in Africa and find clear patterns of causal interaction between politicians’ ethnicity and their prior records. The proposed methodology is implemented in an open source software package.},
  doi       = {10.1080/01621459.2018.1476246},
  file      = {:Egami, Imai (JASA, 2018).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Informa {UK} Limited},
  timestamp = {2018-07-22},
}

@Article{ClaytonFerwerdaHoriuchi2018,
  author    = {Katherine Clayton and Jeremy Ferwerda and Yusaku Horiuchi},
  title     = {Exposure to Immigration and Admission Preferences: Evidence from France},
  year      = {2018},
  note     = {Unpublished paper, Dartmouth University}
}

@Article{HoriuchiSmithYamamoto2018,
  author    = {Horiuchi, Yusaku and Smith, Daniel M. and Yamamoto, Teppei},
  title     = {Measuring Voters' Multidimensional Policy Preferences with Conjoint Analysis: Application to Japan's 2014 Election},
  journal   = {Political Analysis},
  year      = {2018},
  pages     = {1--20},
  month     = {mar},
  abstract  = {Representative democracy entails the aggregation of multiple policy issues by parties into competing bundles of policies, or “manifestos,” which are then evaluated holistically by voters in elections. This aggregation process obscures the multidimensional policy preferences underlying a voter's single choice of party or candidate. We address this problem through a conjoint experiment based on the actual party manifestos in Japan's 2014 House of Representatives election. By juxtaposing sets of issue positions as hypothetical manifestos and asking respondents to choose one, our study identifies the eects of specific positions on the overall assessment of manifestos, heterogeneity in preferences among subgroups of respondents, and the popularity ranking of manifestos. Our analysis uncovers important discrepancies between voter preferences and the portrayal of the election results by politicians and the media as providing a policy mandate to the Liberal Democratic Party, underscoring the potential danger of inferring public opinion from election outcomes alone.},
  doi       = {10.1017/pan.2018.2},
  file      = {:Horiuchi, Smith, Yamamoto (PA, 2018).pdf:PDF},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press ({CUP})},
  timestamp = {2018-03-21},
}

@Article{Shmueli2010,
  author       = {Shmueli, Galit},
  title        = {To Explain or to Predict?},
  journal      = {Statistical Science},
  journaltitle = {Statistical Science},
  year         = {2010},
  date         = {2010},
  volume       = {25},
  number       = {3},
  month        = aug,
  pages        = {289--310},
  doi          = {10.1214/10-sts330},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/10-STS330},
  abstract     = {Statistical modeling is a powerful tool for developing and testing theories by way of causal explanation, prediction, and description. In many disciplines there is near-exclusive use of statistical modeling for causal explanation and the assumption that models with high explanatory power areinherently of high predictive power. Conflation between explanation and prediction is common, yet the distinction must be understood for progressingscientific knowledge. While this distinction has been recognized in the philosophy of science, the statistical literature lacks a thorough discussion of themany differences that arise in the process of modeling for an explanatory versus a predictive goal. The purpose of this article is to clarify the distinction between explanatory and predictive modeling, to discuss its sources, and to reveal the practical implications of the distinction to each step in the modeling process.},
  file         = {:Schmueli (Statistical Science, 2010).pdf:PDF},
  publisher    = {Institute of Mathematical Statistics},
}

@Book{Xie2015,
    title = {Dynamic Documents with {R} and knitr},
    author = {Yihui Xie},
    publisher = {Chapman and Hall/CRC},
    address = {Boca Raton, Florida},
    year = {2015},
    edition = {2nd},
    note = {ISBN 978-1498716963},
    url = {https://yihui.name/knitr/},
  }

@Comment{jabref-meta: databaseType:bibtex;}
